JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)March 25, 2004

T-285 de 2004

The official text of this ruling is in Spanish and is shown as published by the Colombian authorities.

Reporting justice Alfredo Beltrán Sierra

✓Claimant Leon Dario Tobon Orrego Vs Contraloria General Antioquia

✓
Topic · hard data
Derecho Al Debido Proceso De Apelante Unico. Via De Hecho. Proceso De Responsabilidad Fiscal Por Contraloria. Grado De Culpa. Reformatio In Pejus. Concedida.
01

Topics and subtopics of the ruling

✓What the ruling decides and analyzes, as indexed by the Court's case-law reporter's office. Each topic links to every decision that addresses it.

Via De Hecho En Proceso De Responsabilidad Fiscal
  • Desconocimiento de sentencia de la Corte Constitucional
Principio De No Reformatio In Pejus En Proceso Disciplinario
  • Cambio de calificación de la falta de leve a grave
2 topics · 2 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
02

What it decided

This decision records no constitutional review holdings. This is common in tutela rulings and orders, where the decision does not concern a legal provision.
·

Operative part (Resuelve)

✓Verbatim text of the decision, as it appears in the ruling. It complements the structured holdings above.

See the operative part (3 points)
  1. Primero. Revocase la sentencia proferida por el Juzgado Doce Penal del Circuito de Medellin, que nego la accion de tutela instaurada por el senor Leon Dario Tobon Orrego, en contra de la Contraloria General de Antioquia. En consecuencia, Concedase el amparo solicitado.
  2. Segundo. Ordenase al Contralor General de Antioquia o a quien haga sus veces que en el termino de cuarenta y ocho (48) horas contadas a partir de la notificacion de esta providencia, declare la nulidad del fallo 002 de enero 14 de 2003 proferido dentro del proceso fiscal adelantado en contra del senor Leon Dario Tobon Orrego.
  3. Tercero. Por Secretaria General, librense las comunicaciones a que se refiere el articulo 36 del decreto 2591 de 1991.
Verbatim text · source: operative part of the ruling
03

The bench that decided

We distinguish who appears in the ruling (signature, vote or concurrence) from who probably sat on the Court on that date. The difference is shown by color and shape.

04

How it connects

Each decision is a node in the case-law network: it cites some and is cited by others. Follow the threads.

The document’s networkthe most influential links · node size is how often the Court cites it
constitutional review unification tutela

The indexed topics and subtopics of this decision are above, in Topics and subtopics of the ruling.